Matematik Eğitimi Alanındaki Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi Çalışmalarının İncelenmesi

Year 2026, Volume: 11 Issue: 1 , 37 - 46 , 30.04.2026

Şeyma Barbaros , Elif Saygı

https://doi.org/10.53506/egitim.1794112

https://izlik.org/JA34YL75CB

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, 2020-2024 yılları arasında matematik eğitiminde Teknolojik Pedagojik İçerik Bilgisi (TPAB) konusunda yapılan çalışmaları incelemektir. Araştırmada sistematik literatür tarama yöntemi kullanılmıştır. ScienceDirect, Wiley Online Library, Taylor & Francis, Springer Link ve Web of Science veri tabanları incelenmiş; toplam 68 çalışma tespit edilerek araştırma kapsamına alınmıştır. Elde edilen çalışmalar matematiğin bilişsel ve duyuşsal alan temaları ve alt alanları açısından analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre bilişsel alan temalarının duyuşsal alanlardan daha sık incelendiği bulunmuştur. Bilişsel alanda ağırlıklı olarak bilgi düzeylerine odaklanılırken, duyuşsal alanda ise tutum temalarına ağırlık verilmiştir. Matematiksel içerik açısından çalışmaların ağırlıklı olarak geometri alt alanında yoğunlaştığı belirlenmiştir. Bu çalışmanın matematik eğitiminde TPAB ile ilgili uluslararası veri tabanlarındaki eğilimleri ortaya koyarak ve mevcut araştırma boşluklarını belirleyerek literatüre önemli katkı sağlaması beklenmektedir. Ayrıca, benzer konularda çalışma yapmayı planlayan araştırmacılara kapsamlı ve bütüncül bir değerlendirme sunarak yol gösterici bir kaynak olması öngörülmektedir.

Keywords

Teknolojik pedagojik içerik bilgisi , matematik eğitimi , betimsel içerik analizi

A Review of Studies on Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Mathematics Education

https://izlik.org/JA34YL75CB

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to review the studies conducted on Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) in mathematics education between 2020 and 2024. The research employed a systematic literature review method. The databases ScienceDirect, Wiley Online Library, Taylor & Francis, Springer Link, and Web of Science were examined; a total of 68 studies were identified and included in the scope of this research. The studies obtained were analyzed in terms of cognitive and affective domain themes and subfields of mathematics. According to the results of the research, cognitive domain themes were found to be examined more frequently than affective domains. Within the cognitive domain, the focus was mainly on knowledge levels, whereas within the affective domain, attitude themes were emphasized. In terms of mathematical content, it was determined that the studies were primarily concentrated in the geometry subfield. This study is expected to significantly contribute to the literature by revealing trends in international databases on TPACK in mathematics education and identifying existing research gaps. Furthermore, it is anticipated to serve as a guiding resource for researchers planning to conduct studies on similar topics by offering a comprehensive and holistic evaluation.

Keywords

Technological pedagogical content knowledge , mathematics education , descriptive content analysis

References

• AbdulRab, H. M. A. (2023). Teacher Professional Development in the 21st Century. African Journal of Education and Practice, 9(4), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.47604/ajep.2237
• Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154–168.
• Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing Practice, Developing Practitioners: Toward a Practice-Based Theory of Professional Education. In G. Sykes, & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), Teaching as the Learning Profession: Handbook of Policy and Practice (pp. 3-32). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
• Barn, B., Barat, S., and Clark, T. (2017). Conducting Systematic Literature Reviews and Systematic Mapping Studies, Proceedings of the 10th Innovations in Software Engineering Conference (ISEC '17), 212-213. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3021460.3021489
• Baydar Işık, B. (2021). Türkiye’de Matematik Eğitimi Alanında Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi (Pab) ve Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi (TPAB) Çalışmalarının Betimsel İçerik Analizi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Kocaeli Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Kocaeli.
• Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook II: Affective Domain.
• Cantürk Günhan, B., & Açan, H. (2016). Dinamik Geometri Yazılımı Kullanımının Geometri Başarısına Etkisi: Bir Meta-Analiz Çalışması [The effect of dynamic geometry software use on geometry achievement: A meta-analysis study]. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 7(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.16949/turcomat.67541
• Demiray, E., & Zeybek, N. (2023, August). Mathematics teachers’ self-efficacy toward technological pedagogical content knowledge in different areas of mathematics. Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER 2023), Glasgow, United Kingdom. European Educational Research Association (EERA).
• Erdem, M. (2024). 2009–2023 yılları arasında teknolojik pedagojik içerik bilgisi ve genel bakış açısıyla matematik eğitimi üzerine yapılan lisansüstü tezlerin incelenmesi. [An analysis of graduate theses on mathematics education with a general perspective and technological pedagogical content knowledge between 2009–2023]. Master’s thesis, Kafkas University.
• Erdoğan, A., Şahin İ. (2010). Matematik Öğretmeni Adaylarının Teknolojik Pedagojik ve Alan Bilgisi (TPAB) ile Başarı Düzeyleri Arasındaki İlişki [The relationship between preservice mathematics teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) and achievement levels]. Procedia Social And Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2707-2711.
• Harris, J. D., Quatman, C. E., Manring, M.M., Siston, R.A. & Flanigan, D.C. (2014). How to Write a Systematic Review, The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 42(11). DOI: 10.1177/0363546513497567
• Hui, H. B., & Mahmud, M. S. (2023). Influence of game-based learning in mathematics education on the students’ cognitive and affective domain: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1105806. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1105806
• Kim, S., & Hong, S. (2018). The effects of school contexts and student characteristics on cognitive and affective achievement in South Korea. Asia Pacific Education Review, 19(4), 557–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-018-9557-2
• Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2013). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: What is ‘enhanced’ and how do we know? Studies in Higher Education, 38(8), 1–16.
• Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook II: Affective domain. New York: David McKay Company.
• Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J. (2006). ‘Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge’, Teachers College Record, 108(6).
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G., & Prisma Group. (2009). ‘Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine’, 151(4), 264–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005
• Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
• Öğüt, M. N. (2019). Matematik Öğretmenlerinin Alan Bilgilerine İlişkin Öz Değerlendirme Aracı Olarak Teknoloji Kullanımı [Use of technology as a self-assessment tool regarding mathematics teachers’ content knowledge]. Master’s thesis, Gaziantep University.
• Saharuddin, M. H., & Kamsin, I. F. (2023). Application of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in teaching and learning for mathematics teachers. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 13(12), 3288–3300. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v13-i12/20198
• Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23.
• Juandi, D. (2021). Heterogeneity of problem-based learning outcomes for improving mathematical competence: A systematic literature review. Journal of Physics, 1722(1), 012108. https://doi.org/10.1088/17426596/1722/1/012108
• Page, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … McKenzie, J. E. (2021). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. The BMJ, 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n160
• Polly, D., & Rock, T. (2016). Elementary education teacher candidates’ integration of technology in the design of interdisciplinary units. TechTrends, 60(4), 336–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0059-y
• Ward, P., Kim, I., Ko, B., & Li, W. (2014). Effects of improving teachers’ content knowledge on teaching and the enacted pedagogical content knowledge and in turn the effects on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(4), 463–481.
• Tan, J. P.-L., & Lee, W. O. (2018). The New Roles for Twenty-First-Century Teachers: Facilitator, Knowledge Broker and Pedagogical Weaver. In The Teacher’s Role in the Changing Globalizing World: Resources and Challenges Related to the Professional Work of Teaching (pp. 11–31). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004372573_002
• Yadigaroğlu, M., (2014). Kimya Öğretmenlerinin Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi Modeline Yönelik Bilgi ve Becerilerinin Geliştirilmesi Amacıyla Bir Hizmet İçi Eğitim Kurs Programı Geliştirilmesi ve Etkililiğinin Araştırılması [Developing and evaluating an in-service training program to improve chemistry teachers’ knowledge and skills regarding the TPACK model]. Doctoral dissertation, Karadeniz Technical University.
• Yllana-Prieto, F., González-Gómez, D., & Jeong, J. S. (2023). Influence of two educational Escape Room–Breakout tools in PSTs’ affective and cognitive domain in STEM courses. Heliyon, 9, e12795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e12795